administrators’ performance in compliance with the ... · supervisory plan rodrigo s. dolorosa...
TRANSCRIPT
www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 7 July 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882
IJCRT2007619 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org 5528
Administrators’ Performance in Compliance with the
Standards for Instructional Supervision in the
National Capital Region: Basis for Enhanced
Supervisory Plan
Rodrigo S. Dolorosa
Polytechnic University of the Philippines Quezon City Branch, Commonwealth, Quezon City, Philippines
Abstract. Instructional supervision is a professional continuous and cooperative process for the improvement of learning and
teaching instruction. This study assessed the level of performance of the administrators’ duties and responsibilities and its
relationship to their level of compliance with the standards for instructional supervision.This paper considers how
instructional supervision and support by educational authorities help improve the teaching–learning process and the
professional development of school administrators in the secondary public schools in the National Capital Region (Metro
Manila, Philippines). To date the research into this field in the Philippine educational system has tended to focus on the
mechanics and standards of instructional supervision among school administrators. The paper examines how administrators
perform their duties and responsibilities in compliance with the standards for instructional supervision as basis for enhancing
instructional supervisory plan. It also investigates how administrators improve the teaching–learning process and provide
effective professional development of teachers at public secondary school level. The paper aims to develop and enhance an
effective instructional supervisory plan among school heads to support the four (4) key areas of teaching-learning process,
the Instructional Support for Teachers’ Effectiveness and Efficiency; Teachers Capability Building; Curricular
Enhancement; and Assessment of Learning Outcomes. It concludes by recommending various measures for strengthening the
efforts of school administrators in the public secondary schools and provide academic and instructional support to teachers
and students for quality education.
Keywords: Administrators’ Performance; Duties and Responsibilities; Instructional Supervision; Enhanced Supervisory
Plan; Administrative Supervision ; Teachers’ Professional Development
1. Introduction
Restructuring the Philippines’ basic educational system through the K to 12 Program is a tough but strategic move by the
government to ensure that it produces competent graduates who can serve as the backbone for a highly skilled and employable
workforce. An important concern in our educational system today is supervision. Thus, there is a need to conduct this study in
order to validate the performance of our school administrators in doing their duties and responsibilities and if they comply with
the standards for instructional supervision. “Supervision is a framework that holds a successful school together . It is a process
by which some person or group of people is responsible for providing a link between an individual teacher needs and the
organizational goals that individuals within the school can work in harmony toward their vision of what the school should be”.
Glickman, 1990. School administrators such as principals and department heads are the key significant respondents of this
study. The school administrators must be in the position to promote continuous learning and development of teachers who are
challenged to teach students to higher standards of quality education. Tirozzi indicates (2011) , “the principals and school heads
www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 7 July 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882
IJCRT2007619 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org 5529
of tomorrow schools must be instructional leaders who possess the requisite skills, capacities and commitments to lead the
accountability parade , not follow it”.
The duties and responsibilities of an instructional leaders or school administrators is an important aspect of
supervisory work of a school leader. Its basic function is to improve and develop the support for teacher’s professional
growth and development in the improvement of teaching-learning outcomes. Instructional supervisors or instructional
leaders are tasked to do supervisory work from which teachers get immediate support for their professional development.
These instructional leaders may be external or internal to school where the teacher is teaching. External to the school,
Instructional leaders include the education supervisors, and district supervisors while the internal to the school include
the principal, department chairs, school heads, master teachers and the teacher leaders themselves. Individually, each has
a specific duty as embodied in their duties and responsibilities but they have common tasks, that of instructional
supervision. They may differ in their areas of jurisdiction, but whether such responsibility is within the school, the
district, division or region, their main goal is to assist a teacher in improving teaching and classroom instruction.
CLINICAL SUPERVISION
CLINICAL SUPERVISION
Figure 1. Standards for Instructional Supervision
Instructional Supervision is a standard based comprehensive development set of processes to support the
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT of teachers in professional learning communities. Its ultimate goal
is the improvement of instruction for enhanced learning outcomes. Presented the figure 2 above is the STANDARDS for
Instructional Supervision and their indicators that will support the theoretical framework of this study. Its basis is from the
Department of Education. Instructional Supervision: Standards, Procedures and Tools for supervisors and school
administrators. Designed and developed by Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda- Teacher Education and
Development.
The researcher believed that this study on the administrators’ performance of their duties and responsibilities and
their compliance with the standards of instructional supervision is best suited to the present conditions and needs of
principals, assistant principals, department heads and the master teachers who are considered the respondents of this study.
This simply echoes what the researcher had known for years. The result or the findings of this study would be a basis for
designing a new enhanced supervisory plan for public secondary schools in the National Capital Region. Determining the
level of performance by assessing themselves as school administrators- and their compliance with the standards of
Instructional Supervision, are the significant factors in considering this study. It is by means of this study that we can
design an enhance supervisory plan which is the main output of this study.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND
TEACHERS SUPPORT TEACHERS’ ACTION RESEARCH
STANDARDS for
INSTRUCTIONAL
SUPERVISION
DEMOCRATIC SUPERVISION CLINICAL SUPERVISION
FORMATIVE TEACHING COLLEGIALITY & COLLABORATION
CURRICULUM SUPERVISION ETHICAL TEACHING
DIVERSITY OF TEACHERS AND LEARNERS INQUIRY AND REFLECTIVE TEACHING
www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 7 July 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882
IJCRT2007619 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org 5530
Figure 2. Areas of Support for Instructional Supervision
The duties and responsibilities of an instructional leaders or school administrators is an important aspect of
supervisory work of a school leader. Its basic function is to improve and develop the support for teacher’s professional
growth and development in the improvement of teaching-learning outcomes
The scope of this study is limited only among high school principals and head teachers in the public secondary high
schools of Metro Manila or National Capital Region, Philippines. The intent of this study is to assess the level of
performance of our school administrators’ duties and responsibilities and their compliance with the standards for
instructional supervision which would be the basis for designing an enhanced supervisory plan.
Specifically, this study seeks to answer the following questions:
1. What is the personal profile of school administrators as respondents in terms of: 1)Age 2) Sex 3) Civil Status 4 )
Educational Attainment;.5) Length of Service as School Administrator, and, 6) Designation ?
2. What is the respondents’ level of performance in accomplishing their Duties and Responsibilities in terms of: .1)
Instructional Support for Teachers’ Effectiveness and Efficiency ;2) Teacher Capability Building ;3.) Curricular
Enhancement ; and.4) Assessment of Learning Outcomes?
3. What is the respondents’ level of compliance with the Standards of Instructional Supervision in terms of the following:
Democratic Supervision; Collegiality and Collaboration; Professional Development Teacher’s Support; Inquiry and
Reflective Teaching; Diversity of Teachers and Learners; Clinical Supervision; Formative Teacher Evaluation; Teacher’s
Action Research; Curriculum Supervision; and Ethical Teaching?
4. Is there a significant relationship between the respondents’ level of performance and the level of compliance with the
standards for instructional supervision? 5. Is there a significant difference between the respondents’ level of performance in
accomplishing their duties and responsibilities and the level of compliance of the standards for instructional supervision
when they are grouped according to their professional profile?
Quality education is the best that the country can offer, a call that leads to quality employment for a better quality of life.
Hence, lawmakers should still be in the lookout for potential advancements in the current status of our education system. It
is hoped that through this study, our government by its Department of Education should continue to formulate laws and
through its reform agenda, would issue DepEd Memorandum Guidelines on Instructional Supervision on how to formulate
and implement the Schools Instructional Supervisory Plan.
2. Methodology
This study is a quantitative research. The study used the descriptive-evaluation design using quantitative research
method to determine the relationship of administrators’ level of performance and the level of compliance with the standards
of instructional supervision; basis for designing an enhanced supervisory plan. The study utilized the survey questionnaire to
gather relevant information.
2.1 Research Instrument
The survey-questionnaire was utilized primarily for the purpose of gathering information and significant data for the
study.The finality of this instrument undergoes the process of pilot-testing or a Reliability test from selected Principals
and Head Teachers from 30 selected public secondary schools in the National Capital Region. The purpose of this pre-
Instructional Support for Teachers
Effectiveness and Efficiency
Teachers Capability Building
Assessment of Learning Outcomes
Curricular Enhancement
FOUR (4) KEY
AREAS
FOR TEACHERS’
SUPPORT
www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 7 July 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882
IJCRT2007619 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org 5531
testing was to find out if there are ambiguous questions which are not necessarily be included in the formation of this
questionnaire. The final draft of this questionnaire was presented to the adviser and statistician for further critiquing.
2.2 Population, Sample Size and Sampling Techniques
Selected School School Principals, Assistant Principals, and Head Teachers from different department are fitted to
answer the survey questionnaires and are considered the respondents of this study. Selected Public Secondary schools in all
cities and one municipality of Metro Manila are represented in this study. The researcher will use simple random sampling
technique using Slovin’s formula in the selection of the respondents from all secondary public schools in the National
Capital Region (NCR).
The researcher will determine the sample using the formula with a standard level of significance of 5%
(0.05). The formula is:
N
N > = ___________
1 + Ne 2
Where: n = sample size
N = total number of the population
e = margin of error
Table 1. Distribution of Sample Respondents by their Designation
NCR-Division of
City Schools
Principals/
Assistant
Principals
Head
Teachers
Total Number
Respondents
Percentage
%
Caloocan City 7 33 40 9.39
Las Pinas City 5 16 21 4.99
Mandaluyong City 2 8 10 2.35
Makati City 1 8 9 2.11
Malabon City 4 24 28 6.57
Manila City 5 28 33 7.75
Marikina City 6 37 43 10.09
Muntinlupa City 1 9 10 2.35
Navotas City 3 17 20 4.69
Pasig City 7 21 28 6.57
Paranaque City 6 14 20 4.70
Pasay City 8 26 34 7.98
Quezon City 14 62 76 17.84
San Juan City 1 8 9 2.11
Taguig City and
Pateros
5 24 29 6.81
Valenzuela City 2 8 10 2.35
Total 82 344 426 100.00%
Table 1 shows that there are 40 or 9.39 % of the administrator- respondents in the Division of City Schools of Caloocan City; 21 or
4.99% are from Las Pinas City.; 10 respondents or 2.35 % from Mandaluyong City; from Makati City is 9 respondents or 2.11%; 28 or
6.57% respondent answered the instruments from Malabon City; a total of 33 or 7.75% of the respondents are from Manila City Division
Office; 43 or 10.09 % of them are administrators from Marikina City; 10 respondents o 2.35% from Muntinlupa City Schools; 20 or
4.69% of the respondents from Navotas City; 28 or 6.57% of the respondents from Pasig City; 20 or 470% of the respondents are from
Paranaque City; 34 or 7.98% of the respondents are from Pasay City; a total of 76 or 17.84% of the respondent are from Quezon City; 9
or 2.11 were from San Juan City; 29 or 6.81 % of the respondents were from Taguig City and Pateros; and finally, there are 10 or 2.35%
were from Valenzuela City.
www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 7 July 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882
IJCRT2007619 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org 5532
3. Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework as shown in Figure 2, is a Simple System Approach (Input-Process-Output). The input of the study
shows the respondents’ profile of the school administrators (District supervisors, area supervisors, principals, assistant principals and
school department heads) in terms of their gender, position or rank, length of service in the government, major field of specialization,
educational attainment, other assignments and their designation.
Figure 3. Research Paradigm
PROCESS
PPROCESS
PROCESS
The IPO of this study presents the normal paradigm in the Conceptual Framework. It is shown that the Input of this study
includes the Demographic Profile of the Respondents; Duties and Responsibilities of the School Administrators based on the Manual
for Instructional Supervision: Standards, Tools and Procedures from the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda; the Standard
indicators from the same manual. This Input is the Independent Variables of this study. The process includes data-gathering,
distribution of survey questionnaire, and the presentation and the analysis of data gathered. Finally, the Output of this study would be,
the researcher will come up with the best supervisory practices in our school system, improve the delivery of leanings from our
teachers to the students and will also serve as a basis of redesigning a new instructional supervisory plan in the basic education
sector. The Output is considered the Dependent variables.
From the DepEd handbook on Instructional Supervision: Standards, Procedures and Tools, the researcher presented the
specific duties and responsibilities of the supervisor under the four areas of support, namely: 1.) Instructional Support for Teachers’
Effectiveness and Efficiency; 2.) Teacher Capability building; 3.) Curricular enhancement and, 4.) Assessment of Learning Outcomes.
Also, from this handbook on Instructional Supervision prescribed through DepEd Memorandum Order, the researcher will use
the indicators stipulated in the standard for Instructional Supervision. As stated in the handbook, the following are the standards for
Instructional supervision; 1.) Democratic Supervision, 2.) Collegiality and Collaboration, 3.) Professional Development and Teacher
Support, 4.) Ethical Teaching, 5.) Inquiry and Reflective Teaching, 6.) Diversity of Teachers and Learners, 7.) Clinical Supervision,
8.) Formative Teacher Evaluation, 9.) Curriculum Supervision, 10.) Teacher Action Research.
The process includes the Review of Related Literature and Studies and Data Gathering through Survey using questionnaire.
The output of this study is the proposed enhanced instructional supervisory plan of public secondary schools in Metro Manila.
INPUT
OUTPUT PROCESS
Proposed
Enhanced
Supervisory
Plan
FEEDBACK
1. Data Gathering
2. Survey Questionnaires
4. Data Analysis
5. Theories of Supervision
a. Directive Supervision
b. Collaborative
c. Non-Directive
d. Creative Supervision
1. Personal Profile of
the Respondents
2. Level of
Performance of
Administrators’
Duties and
Responsibilities
3. Level of
Compliance with the
Standards for
Instructional
Supervision
www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 7 July 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882
IJCRT2007619 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org 5533
3. Results and Discussion
The Administrator’s Level of Performance of their Duties and Responsibilities
Among the Four hundred twenty -six respondents of this study, most of the respondents assessed themselves as Outstanding in
performing their duties and responsibilities as school administrators with an over-all weighted mean of 4.32 in terms of; Instructional
Support for Teachers’ Effectiveness and Efficiency.Teacher Capability Building Curricular Enhancement; and Assessment of Learning
Outcomes.
The study found out that most of the respondents are male with a frequency of 322 while female are only 104 with a total respondents of
426. With regards to their age bracket, 38.03 % of the respondents belong to the age bracket of 41-45 years old with a frequency of 162
respondents while there are only 6 belong to the age range from 26 to 30 years old. When it comes to their civil status, 394 or 92.49% of
the respondents are married, while 21 or 4.93 % of the respondents are single. For their Educational Attainment, majority of the
respondents have completed their academic requirements in MA/Master’s degree program while only 7 or 1.64% of them graduated their
Doctorate program. For their length of service, 96 or 22.54% of the respondents have 21-25 years in service to the government while
there are 9 of them have 36 to 40 years in service. For their designation, there are 211 Master Teachers, 133 Head Teachers, and 49
among the respondents are school principals. In summary, these criteria on measuring administrators’ level of performance in
accomplishing their duties and responsibilities, yielded the following results: Instructional Support for Teachers’ Effectiveness and
Efficiency (4.39, Outstanding); Teacher Capability Building, (4.30, Outstanding); Curricular Enhancement, (4.30, Outstanding); and
Assessment of Learning Outcomes, (4.32, Outstanding). Thus, the over-all performance has gained a general weighted mean of 4.33. For
no.4 Problem, summarizes the correlation of all four (4) aspects of the respondents’ level of performance in accomplishing their duties
and responsibilities with all ten aspects of the respondents’ compliance with the standards for instructional supervision. Almost all
correlations are positive with only two negative correlations. A positive correlation means that the respondents rating on the two variables
are directly proportional. On the other hand, a negative correlation means that the two variables are inversely proportional. For example,
Curricular Enhancement is negatively correlated with Democratic Supervision with a correlation of -0.0039. The p-value for all four
aspects are all greater than the significant level of 0.05. Hence, in all these four tests, the null hypothesis are accepted.
In summary, there are no differences on the respondents’ assessment on the compliance with the standards for Instructional
Supervision when grouped according to sex. This result holds for all ten (10) aspects, starting with Standards for Democratic Supervision
with a p-value of 0.8206 to Ethical Teaching with a p-value of 0.6092.
Administrators’ Level of Performance of their Duties and Responsibilities as Instructional Leaders
In today’s educational system, school administrators play a vital role in achieving quality education for all. The basic
purpose of this study is to determine the level of performance of the administrators’ duties and responsibilities as an instructional leader
in compliance with the standards for instructional supervision. By determining their performance, we come up with an expectation that
our education should improve the support for teachers’ professional, growth and the development in their teaching-learning outcomes.
Principals, Head Teachers who acted as school administrators are the main subjects of this study. To achieve the purpose determined in
this study, school administrators were asked to determine their level of performance accurately and in the most honest manner, to assess
themselves whether they performed well and carrying out their duties and responsibilities as an instructional leader. School
administrators perform supervisory functions in their respective school. It defines their duties and responsibilities as Principals, Head
Teachers. The table below is an example of the level of performance of the administrators’ duties and responsibilities as instructional
leaders.
Table 2. Respondents’ performance in accomplishing their duties and responsibilities in terms of Instructional support for Teachers
Effectiveness and Efficiency
Instructional Support for Teacher Effectiveness and Efficiency
Poor Fair Satisfactory Very
Satisfactory Outstanding WM VI 1 2 3 4 5
Frequency Assumes leadership and supervises teachers on the improvement of national program specifically
the teaching-learning process. 0 0 19 221 186 4.39 O
Motivates and support teachers in identifying strengths and growth areas through monitoring
and evaluation. 0 1 12 217 196 4.43 O
Provides professional, technical and instructional
assistance to teachers and school heads. 0 1 41 219 165 4.29 O Promotes DepEd programs and projects to
improve teaching and learning. 0 0 33 207 186 4.36 O Promotes the efficiency of teaching and learning
in all classes through observation and classroom visitations.
0 0 31 178 217 4.44 0
Evaluates performance of teachers. 0 0 24 185 217 4.45 O
Overall Weighted Mean: 4.39 O Legend: (4.21-5.00) –(O)-"Outstanding", (3.41-4.20) – (VS)- "Very Satisfactory", (2.61-3.40) – (S)-"Satisfactory",(1.81-2.60) –
"Fair", (1.00-1.80) – "Good". (WM)- “Weighted Mean” and (VI)- Verbal Interpretation
www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 7 July 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882
IJCRT2007619 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org 5534
The results shown in Table 2 indicates that 426 respondents with an overall weighted mean 4.39 said that their performance in
accomplishing their duties and responsibilities is Outstanding when it comes to Instructional Support for Teachers Effectiveness and
Efficiency.
Table 2 shows that the respondents are outstanding in accomplishing their duties and responsibilities in terms of instructional
support for teacher effectiveness and efficiency with an overall weighted mean of 4.39. This part has six questions and the respondents
perform best in evaluating performance of teachers with a weighted mean of 4.45.
This means that respondents are very particular to their duties and responsibilities as a school -administrators. As soon as possible, they
should perform their duties well and accomplish them as long they can. Based on their personal assessment, they rated themselves as
outstanding in all their supervisory functions in school.
4. Conclusion and Recommendations.
1. The study indicated that school administrators performed and accomplish their Duties and Responsibilities and other supervisory
activities as Instructional leaders very well in their respective schools.
2. All of the indicators under the Level of Performance of their Duties and Responsibilities to the different areas of support for Teachers
which were assessed by the administrator-respondents were rated Outstanding in their Performance.
3. All of the indicators under the Compliance of Standards for Instructional Supervision as assessed by the administrator-respondents
were fully complied, which means that respondents were positively and strongly agree to all the indicators stipulated in the standards for
Instructional Supervision.
4. All of the enumerated standards for Instructional Supervision were important in the promotion and achievement of teachers’
professional growth and development in the improvement of teaching-learning and learning outcomes. The utilization and the proper use
of a good supervisory plan was essential to teachers who aims to improve his/ her teaching instruction with the support of his/her
administrator. Its ultimate goal is the improvement of instruction for enhanced learning outcomes.
5. Teachers viewed their school administrators as instructional leaders and instructional supervisors. As it is, both of these school agents
(Principals, Head Teachers, Supervisors. and Teachers) are considered the catalysts of change. Changes and reforms or challenges in the
educational systems starts with in them. They, as agents of change should have a resilient collaboration to facilitate the teaching and
learning processes in their respective schools. Thus, there was a strong underlying positive correlation between school administrators and
teachers.
5. Recommendations
1.The Department of Education through its various sectors for educational reforms should formulate an institutionalized reform agenda
on matters of Instructional Supervision. The Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA) shall innovate the existing Plans for
Supervisors and Instructional Leaders. The planning, designing and evaluating of these differentiated forms of supervision shall be based
on the current social and cultural needs of the teachers and the students.
2.The rising importance of Instructional Supervisory Plan in every school in the country (both in private and public) for school
administrators has underpinned the public secondary schools in restructuring and prioritization of innovative and relevant supervisory
tools and standards. There is a need for closer supervision of school administrators regarding the actual implementation of DepEd. Order
relevant to Instructional Supervision for Teachers.
3. Since the ultimate goal of designing this Instructional Supervision is the improvement of instruction for enhanced learning outcomes,
the government through its Department of Education should initiate or enact laws and policies concerning the development and
promotion of teachers’ academic professional achievements.
4. School administrators such as the Principals, Assistant Principals, Head Teachers, and Master Teachers, as Instructional leaders of their
own respective schools, shall be given more privileges socially and economically, and undergo training and studies to intensify their
leadership skills and social roles and promoting their sense of self-efficacy for they provide teachers professional, technical and
instructional assistance.
5. It is further recommended to the school administrators that they should continue to undertake periodic evaluation of learners’
achievement as basis for curriculum adaptation, continue to develop and promote innovative and effective assessment approaches,
strategies and techniques and continue to assist the teachers in identifying strengths and growth areas through constant monitoring and
classroom observation.
Acknowledgment
The researcher would like to extend his heartfelt gratitude and appreciation to : the Polytechnic University of the Philippines, College of
Education -Graduate Studies, where I earned this degree program and this accredited research journal publication for this rare
opportunity to share my research article for publication . Thank you very much.
www.ijcrt.org © 2020 IJCRT | Volume 8, Issue 7 July 2020 | ISSN: 2320-2882
IJCRT2007619 International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts (IJCRT) www.ijcrt.org 5535
REFERENCES
1. Anderson, Samuel (2008). Curriculum Implementation. Toronto: University of Toronto, Canada.
2. Belin, R. (2009). “What Every Supervisor Should Know”. New York. McGraw Hill Publishing House, New York, USA.
3. Blase, J. (1998). “Handbook of Intructional Leadership: How Really Good Principals Promote Teaching and Learning”. Thousands
Oak, California, Corwin Press, Inc.
4. Chigwedere, Anderson Norman. (1995). “A Handbook for School Administrators”, Harare Government Printing Press, Harare,
Zimbabwe.
5. Department of Education. “Manual on Instructional Supervision:Standards, Tools, and Practices for School Administrators: DepEd
Technical Panel, Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA), Pasig City, NCR, Philippines.
6. Doll, John Lyndon. (2008). “Improving School Instructions”. New York: W.W. Norton Press, USA. 7. Glickman, Carl D. “SuperVision and Instructional Leadership: A Developmental Approach” (8th Edition)
8. Gordon,Stephen G.; ”SuperVision and Instructional Leadership: A Developmental Approach”; (8th Edition) New York: W.W.
Norton Press, USA. Texas State University.
9.Ross, Jovita M.; “ SuperVision and Instructional Leadership: A Developmental Approach (8th Edition); Mc Graw Hill, Com.;New
York: W.W. Norton Press, USA. Texas State University.
9. Zepeda, Sally J. (2016). “Applying Tools and Concepts”. Second Edition. An Eye on Education Book. Published.
10. Zepeda, Sally J. (2004). “ Introduction to the Special Issue on Instructional Supervision”, National Association of Secondary
School Principals. Bulletin 88 (639) 1-2